May 2008 — Features
Print this article | Email this articleClick here to receive your FREE subscription to T.H.E. Journal
Together at Last
Use of the new system is voluntary. However, all of the state's special education units have indicated that they will participate. And even if they opt out of the reporting process, they will still be required to input their data into the system.
"The NDDPI has been working on this process for several years," says Nora Paape. "The idea is to implement a system with which they could gather the data at a statewide level, monitor districts, and help them to make improvements on services for students with disabilities." Paape works for government services provider Maximus, and is serving as the project director for the NDDPI's installation of the company's Tienet special education case management system.
Maximus is managing a neat trick with this project: It's unifying an entire state's IEP reporting process while sidestepping the SIS/IEP data integration issue. How? By taking the data from an established statewide reporting system. North Dakota's State Automated Reporting System (STARS) is a unique, state-developed assessment system for reporting student progress in meeting the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act and in determining adequate yearly progress. North Dakota educators use a mix of locally designed assessments in tandem with national tests and statewide writing assessments to measure the performance of students.
"We learned early on in this project about STARS," explains Suku Sukumar, director of operations in Maximus' Educational Services Division. "So instead of linking the Tienet special ed system with the individual SISs, we decided to link with STARS, which already had connectivity with these systems."
"We call this our authoritative data source for student demographic information," says Miller. "Some of our smaller special ed units don't have an SIS, but every student in the state is in the STARS system." By linking Tienet to STARS, Maximus eliminated the need for constant monitoring of the connections with the various individual SISs, which represent multiple points of potential failure, Sukumar explains. The current configuration requires that the system monitor just one connection. "It's incredibly efficient," he says.
Among the things that North Dakota has done right on this project, says Paape, is the effort it put into including all the school districts in the process of configuring the system. "It was very smart," she says. "Now it's everybody's system. We've seen states put together special ed case management systems in sort of a vacuum. They weren't as successful as they will be in North Dakota." In other words, Chula Vista's Grabowski says, the successful integration of an SIS and an IEP depends ultimately on the people who will be using that data.
"It might seem obvious to say it, but just integrating these two systems doesn't mean you'll get the special education teachers to embrace the system," she says. "My advice is to start with the willing, build the population of people who are going adopt the system and advocate for it, and let the momentum work. And remember, these are teachers, not computer people, so don't expect them to love the technology for its own sake. Show them how it will help them to do a better job helping students."
::WEBEXTRAS ::
If you would like more information on IEPs, visit
here. In the Browse by Topic menu,
click on Special Needs Students.
John K. Waters is a freelance writer based in Mountain View, CA.
Cite this Site
copy text (above) for proper citation
